Rasmus H Birk1, Gabrielle Samuel2. 1. Department of Communication & Psychology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark. rbirk@ikp.aau.dk. 2. Department of Global Health & Social Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We review recent developments within digital phenotyping for mental health, a field dedicated to using digital data for diagnosing, predicting, and monitoring mental health problems. We especially focus on recent critiques and challenges to digital phenotyping from within the social sciences. RECENT FINDINGS: Three significant strands of criticism against digital phenotyping for mental health have been developed within the social sciences. This literature problematizes the idea that digital data can be objective, that it can be unbiased, and argues that it has multiple ethical and practical challenges. Digital phenotyping for mental health is a rapidly growing and developing field, but with considerable challenges that are not easily solvable. This includes when, and if, data from digital phenotyping is actionable in practice; the involvement of user and patient perspectives in digital phenotyping research; the possibility of biased data; and challenges to the idea that digital phenotyping can be more objective than other forms of psychiatric assessment.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We review recent developments within digital phenotyping for mental health, a field dedicated to using digital data for diagnosing, predicting, and monitoring mental health problems. We especially focus on recent critiques and challenges to digital phenotyping from within the social sciences. RECENT FINDINGS: Three significant strands of criticism against digital phenotyping for mental health have been developed within the social sciences. This literature problematizes the idea that digital data can be objective, that it can be unbiased, and argues that it has multiple ethical and practical challenges. Digital phenotyping for mental health is a rapidly growing and developing field, but with considerable challenges that are not easily solvable. This includes when, and if, data from digital phenotyping is actionable in practice; the involvement of user and patient perspectives in digital phenotyping research; the possibility of biased data; and challenges to the idea that digital phenotyping can be more objective than other forms of psychiatric assessment.